Yes, AMD and other firms have done limited "preview" releases in the past, where select publications are allowed to publish a few pictures and perhaps a handful of benchmark numbers ahead of time. There is some slight precedent there.

But none of that changes the fact that this plan is absolutely, bat-guano crazy. It crosses a line that should not be crossed.

Companies like AMD don't get to decide what gets highlighted in reviews and what doesn't. Using the review press's general willingness to agree on one thing—timing—to get additional control may seem clever, but we've thought it over, and no. We'll keep our independence, thanks.

The email goes on to conclude by, apparently, anticipating such a reaction and offering a chance for feedback:

"We are aware that this is a unique approach to product launches. We are always looking at ways that we can work with you to help drive additional traffic to your articles and effectively convey the AMD message. We strive to provide the best products in their price points, bringing a great product for a great price. Please feel free to provide feedback on what you find, both with the product and with your experience in the AMD New Product Review Program. We try to ensure that we are providing you what you need and appreciate any feedback you have to offer on how we can do better."

I picked up the phone almost immediately after reading this paragraph and attempted to persuade both Mr. Amos and, later, his boss that this plan was not a good one. I was told that this decision was made not just in PR but at higher levels in the company and that my objections had been widely noted in internal emails. Unfortunately, although fully aware of my objections and of the very important basic principle at stake, AMD decided to go through with its plan.

Shame on them for that.

It's possible you may see desktop Trinity "previews" at other websites today that conform precisely to AMD's dictates. I'm not sure. I hope most folks have decided to refrain from participation in this farce, but I really don't know what will happen. I also hope that any who did participate will reconsider their positions after reading this post and thinking about what they're giving up.

And I hope, most of all, that the broader public understands what's at stake here and insists on a change in policy from AMD.

If this level of control from companies over the content of reviews becomes the norm, we will be forced to change the way we work the firms whose products we review. We will not compromise our independence. We believe you demand and deserve nothing less.

Not seeing the problem here, there are NDAs and such other regular formalities in the trade. TR is free to not abide by them if they choose but of course that'll cost them in the form of AMD not considering them for review samples, invitation to events and such. There are consequences just like when you break any other contract (because that's what NDAs ultimately are).

If AMD wants to limit what information is released prior to launch, then that's their call. It's not like they're going to limit what information is published in full reviews once the NDA's lift. This tactic might cost them some initial sales while all of the reviews are posted and digested, but it's not like they're being shady.

AMD already said that they were pulling out of the enthusiast market, so I assume these CPU's will perform accordingly.

Go ahead and "stay independent" by not publishing a full review until AMD allows you to, which is the same exact time AMD allows everyone else to.

since the email refers to PREVIEW information released, every single bit of it is bang on and fair enough, damn intel fantards trying to make a Drama out of nothing, Amd mearly want some info held back untill release day, fair enough.